Reproduced with permission from Revue de droit uniforme/Uniform Law Review (1997) 385-395
(. . .)
[Need to promote uniformity in application of Convention]
Very rarely do decisions take into account the solutions adopted on the same point by courts in other countries. Until now it would appear that there are only two decisions rendered by national judges in which express reference is made to foreign precedents.[10]
The first of these judgments was handed down by the Tribunale Civile of Cuneo. In applying the provisions of the Convention requiring the buyer to examine the goods and give notice of any lack of conformity, the Italian court, for the purpose of interpreting the rather vague formulae "within as short a period as is practicable in the circumstances" and "within a reasonable time" contained in Articles 38 and 39, did not hesitate to refer to two judgments handed down in similar cases in Switzerland by the Pretore of Locarno-Campagna, and in Germany by the Landgericht of Stuttgart.[11]
The second judgment, rendered by the Cour d'appel of Grenoble,[12] expressly referred to a decision of the Oberlandesgericht of Düsseldorf [13] to demonstrate that "l'interprétation habituellement donnée de [l'article 57 de la Convention] est qu'elle exprime le principe général que le paiment s'exécute au domicile du créancier."
(. . .)
Go to entire text of Bonell/Liguori commentary
FOOTNOTES
*
Professor, Law Faculty, University of Rome 1 "La Sapienza"; Legal Consultant, Unidroit.
**
Attorney in Rome; Research fellow, University of Rome 1 "La Sapienza".
(. . .)
(. . .)
Go to Database Directory ||
Go to CISG Table of Contents
|| Go to CISG Case Search Form
Pace Law School Institute of
International Commercial Law
- Last updated August 16, 1999
Comments/Contributions